Cities improperly posting 30.06 signs?

CHL discussions that do not fit into more specific topics

Moderators: Charles L. Cotton, carlson1

User avatar

Liberty
Senior Member
Posts: 5200
Joined: Mon Jul 03, 2006 8:49 pm
Location: Galveston
Contact:

Re: Cities improperly posting 30.06 signs?

Postby Liberty » Mon Jan 16, 2017 7:32 am

OldAg wrote:Another example that you referenced would be the chemical plants on the south side of the city. You could keep a weapon locked in your personal vehicle as long as it was outside of the security fence. If you were to drive into the plant with your weapon, not only could you be fired (as all the companies have it against their policies) but, you also could be arrested since the secured area of a chemical plant is spelled out as a prohibited area in the State statutes.

Hope this helps.

You can drive pass the gate and inside the fence of an oil and chemical plant, as long as there is no 30.06 sign or have recieved legal verbal/written notification.
Liberty''s Blog
"Today, we need a nation of Minutemen, citizens who are not only prepared to take arms, but citizens who regard the preservation of freedom as the basic purpose of their daily life and who are willing to consciously work and sacrifice for that freedom." John F. Kennedy


OldAg
Junior Member
Posts: 35
Joined: Thu Oct 29, 2015 1:50 pm

Re: Cities improperly posting 30.06 signs?

Postby OldAg » Tue Jan 17, 2017 11:54 pm

I need to clarify my post.

I was talking specifically about employees of those chemical companies. The statute that I was thinking of is the same one that requires companies to allow employees to be able to leave their weapons locked in their personal vehicles in the parking lot (Labor Code 52.061) which has an exception for inside the secured area of the plant (LC 52.062).

The company doesn't have to post 30.06/07 notices for the employees because they have already given them verbal notice that handguns are prohibited on company property.

User avatar

ScottDLS
Senior Member
Posts: 3801
Joined: Sun Jun 26, 2005 1:04 am
Location: DFW Area, TX

Re: Cities improperly posting 30.06 signs?

Postby ScottDLS » Wed Jan 18, 2017 12:36 am

OldAg wrote:I need to clarify my post.

I was talking specifically about employees of those chemical companies. The statute that I was thinking of is the same one that requires companies to allow employees to be able to leave their weapons locked in their personal vehicles in the parking lot (Labor Code 52.061) which has an exception for inside the secured area of the plant (LC 52.062).

The company doesn't have to post 30.06/07 notices for the employees because they have already given them verbal notice that handguns are prohibited on company property.


What is the statute that an employee of a chemical plant would be charged with for having a gun in their car? LC 52.062 is not a criminal statute and 30.06 doesn't apply to carrying in your vehicle. :rules: :rules:
4/13/1996 Completed CHL Class, 4/16/1996 Fingerprints, Affidavits, and Application Mailed, 10/4/1996 Received CHL, renewed 1998, 2002, 2006, 2011, 2016...). "ATF... Uhhh...heh...heh....Alcohol, tobacco, and GUNS!! Cool!!!!"

User avatar

mojo84
Senior Member
Posts: 7793
Joined: Tue Jun 21, 2011 4:07 pm
Location: Boerne, TX (Kendall County)

Re: Cities improperly posting 30.06 signs?

Postby mojo84 » Wed Jan 18, 2017 10:00 am

It depends on whether the parking lot is inside the secured portion of the refinery/chemical plant property or not.
******TRIGGER WARNING****** If offended, go find yourself a safe place and color a pretty picture.

My rep said he would consider supporting HB560. https://www.texasfirearmscoalition.com/ ... since-2007


OldAg
Junior Member
Posts: 35
Joined: Thu Oct 29, 2015 1:50 pm

Re: Cities improperly posting 30.06 signs?

Postby OldAg » Wed Jan 18, 2017 11:46 am

Again, not a lawyer, but my understanding is that carrying into a business after being given verbal notice is a Class A misdemeanor. The clause in the labor code just exempts a chemical plant from the protection that you can claim that it was stored in your locked vehicle in their parking lot (since we are talking about inside the secured area).


NotRPB
Senior Member
Posts: 888
Joined: Tue May 05, 2015 8:24 am

Re: Cities improperly posting 30.06 signs?

Postby NotRPB » Fri Jan 20, 2017 7:03 pm

Not sure what section to post this in, didn't see it posted yet.
Ban on guns in Fort Worth spreads to a museum from Zoo

Guns are not allowed any more at the Fort Worth Museum of Science and History.

http://www.star-telegram.com/news/local ... 91539.html
“The law does not prevent them from posting. No, we concur with that,” Holcomb said. “But is the law preventing me from carrying past that sign? The law doesn’t answer that.”

So he said he’s giving state lawmakers until the end of the 85th Legislature in May to straighten out the issue.

“I’m asking the Legislature to fix this,” he said. “They’re creating a dangerous situation for people when they say, ‘Yeah, you can post,’ and ‘Yeah, you can ignore the post.’ ”


OldAg
Junior Member
Posts: 35
Joined: Thu Oct 29, 2015 1:50 pm

Re: Cities improperly posting 30.06 signs?

Postby OldAg » Fri Jan 20, 2017 10:22 pm

Probably would go to this link:

viewtopic.php?t=80848

I filed the complaint against the City for the Museum (actually the Omni Theater) and the letter from the AG was just regurgitating the opinion regarding the zoo. It effectively said that, since the City wasn't posting the sign, they were not violating the law. However, the actual AG opinion also stated that, since it was government property, the AG's opinion was that the 30.06 posting was not valid.

It will probably require a test case unless the Legislature fixes it this session.

User avatar

ScottDLS
Senior Member
Posts: 3801
Joined: Sun Jun 26, 2005 1:04 am
Location: DFW Area, TX

Re: Cities improperly posting 30.06 signs?

Postby ScottDLS » Fri Jan 20, 2017 10:22 pm

mojo84 wrote:It depends on whether the parking lot is inside the secured portion of the refinery/chemical plant property or not.


Again, what statute would you be charged under if you carried into the secured portion of refinery/chemical plant property IN YOUR CAR?
4/13/1996 Completed CHL Class, 4/16/1996 Fingerprints, Affidavits, and Application Mailed, 10/4/1996 Received CHL, renewed 1998, 2002, 2006, 2011, 2016...). "ATF... Uhhh...heh...heh....Alcohol, tobacco, and GUNS!! Cool!!!!"

User avatar

AJSully421
Senior Member
Posts: 1283
Joined: Tue Feb 12, 2008 4:31 pm
Location: Benbrook / SW Fort Worth

Re: Cities improperly posting 30.06 signs?

Postby AJSully421 » Tue Jan 24, 2017 10:00 am

OldAg wrote:Probably would go to this link:

viewtopic.php?t=80848

I filed the complaint against the City for the Museum (actually the Omni Theater) and the letter from the AG was just regurgitating the opinion regarding the zoo. It effectively said that, since the City wasn't posting the sign, they were not violating the law. However, the actual AG opinion also stated that, since it was government property, the AG's opinion was that the 30.06 posting was not valid.

It will probably require a test case unless the Legislature fixes it this session.


Have you noticed that the FW museum now declares itself to be a "museum school". They put out some new sign on the building, including the word "school" in the last few months.

HB 560 cannot pass fast enough.
"The trouble with our liberal friends is not that they're ignorant, it's just that they know so much that isn't so." - Ronald Reagan, 1964

30.06 signs only make criminals and terrorists safer.


chasfm11
Senior Member
Posts: 3065
Joined: Thu Apr 15, 2010 4:01 pm
Location: Northern DFW

Re: Cities improperly posting 30.06 signs?

Postby chasfm11 » Tue Feb 14, 2017 9:43 am

I had the opportunity to attend a meeting last night where the speaker was Attorney General Paxton. We could write down questions for him.

Here was mine.
What does the 2017 Legislature need to do to deal with the government entities that continue to prohibit licensed carry even after the "fines for signs" legislation passed

The person asking all of the questions just happened to be an LTC instructor and embellished my question with his own information.

General Paxton first laughed and talked about his surprise to find out that his office had been tagged with enforcement for the fines for signs. He thanked Donna Campbell for doing that. It was obviously a humorous lead in to what he wanted to say. He said that he had the concern about the inappropriate actions of governments against CHL/LTC while he was still in the Legislature himself.

He said that he felt much could be accomplished by simply tightening up a few definitions. He did not elaborate on exactly which ones or how many of them there were. I was pleased to hear his advocacy for the concept, even if his office has not been as vigorous in that as some of us might have wished.

I was surprised by the depth of his activities. I hadn't realized that his office has 4,200 employees. I also didn't realize that his largest duty was the collection and distribution of child support payments. He talked about how much he was spending on that activity versus other States and how Texas compares with NY in that regard. He also talked in fairly significant detail about the number of times his office has sued the Federal government and the collaboration among the States in those suits. Given all of that, he talked about his office going out to individual court houses to try to determine the situation regarding posting of 30.06 signs.

It will be interesting to see what, if anything comes out of the current session. General Paxton was firm against LTC carry in court houses so I'm not sure exactly what path is open for situations like the one that I faced again yesterday at the Precinct 3 building for Denton County in Lewisville.
6/23-8/13/10 -51 days to plastic
Dun Spiro Spero


locke_n_load
Senior Member
Posts: 901
Joined: Tue Apr 09, 2013 3:35 pm

Re: Cities improperly posting 30.06 signs?

Postby locke_n_load » Tue Feb 14, 2017 10:12 am

AJSully421 wrote:
OldAg wrote:Probably would go to this link:

http://www.texaschlforum.com/viewtopic.php?t=80848

I filed the complaint against the City for the Museum (actually the Omni Theater) and the letter from the AG was just regurgitating the opinion regarding the zoo. It effectively said that, since the City wasn't posting the sign, they were not violating the law. However, the actual AG opinion also stated that, since it was government property, the AG's opinion was that the 30.06 posting was not valid.

It will probably require a test case unless the Legislature fixes it this session.


Have you noticed that the FW museum now declares itself to be a "museum school". They put out some new sign on the building, including the word "school" in the last few months.

HB 560 cannot pass fast enough.


Museum school. So this museum gives classes to other museums?
"They that would give up Essential Liberty, for a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety"

EDC - Glock 26 Gen IV
CHL Holder since 10/08

User avatar

ScottDLS
Senior Member
Posts: 3801
Joined: Sun Jun 26, 2005 1:04 am
Location: DFW Area, TX

Re: Cities improperly posting 30.06 signs?

Postby ScottDLS » Fri Mar 24, 2017 7:24 pm

Just to bump this topic. Went to the Denton County Precinct 3 Building today and I carried concealed past the 30.06 sign. I'm still shaking from the thought of possibly "taking the ride". I pocket carried a .380 auto and the Constable on duty didn't notice... whew!!! :evil2:
4/13/1996 Completed CHL Class, 4/16/1996 Fingerprints, Affidavits, and Application Mailed, 10/4/1996 Received CHL, renewed 1998, 2002, 2006, 2011, 2016...). "ATF... Uhhh...heh...heh....Alcohol, tobacco, and GUNS!! Cool!!!!"


RicoTX
Member
Posts: 125
Joined: Mon Nov 16, 2015 2:35 pm

Re: Cities improperly posting 30.06 signs?

Postby RicoTX » Sun Mar 26, 2017 3:14 pm

With respect to Paxton, his office does not do most of the work collecting child support, thousands of small business owners do. We are the ones who have to submit all new employees to the state, then we get a child support withholding order via email or snail mail. It tells us how much to withhold, for the most part. We still have to do some calculations depending on the amount. Then WE make a check payable to the State each pay period and mail it with a cover letter detailing which orders it applies to and the amounts. Even for one employee, this takes me about 10 minutes per week. Keep in mind, we are the ones that keep the state updated on the addresses, and we have to let the state know if the employee address changes. If the person quits or is fired, we have to let the State know, and they even ask if we know where the person is now employed, although I never bother.

So, Sorry Mr. Paxton, but the majority of man hours collecting child support is done by thousands of business owners, not you. It is a hidden cost of doing business that owners soon learn about.

If a business openly disobeyed the child support law like local governments do in regards to posting 30.06 signs, I can guarantee you Mr. Paxton would have you in court quickly and fine you big time. Sorry, but I cannot respect the man at this time. He makes sure I obey the law, I expect him to do the same of local governments.

User avatar

sbrawley
Senior Member
Posts: 632
Joined: Sat Apr 26, 2014 11:32 pm
Location: Lubbock

Re: Cities improperly posting 30.06 signs?

Postby sbrawley » Thu Apr 27, 2017 5:21 am

The public lobby at the Harris County Sheriff's processing center is now posted with a big red ugly 30.06 sign. This is on the public side where there is no access to the secure side.
When government takes away citizens' right to bear arms, it becomes citizens' duty to take away government's right to govern
Unknown
2015 NRA Lifetime Member


Papa_Tiger
Senior Member
Posts: 445
Joined: Fri May 24, 2013 9:55 am

Re: Cities improperly posting 30.06 signs?

Postby Papa_Tiger » Thu Apr 27, 2017 7:41 am

sbrawley wrote:The public lobby at the Harris County Sheriff's processing center is now posted with a big red ugly 30.06 sign. This is on the public side where there is no access to the secure side.
Elections have consequences. - Someone "famous".


Return to “General Texas CHL Discussion”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 14 guests